The Stacks project

37.60 Ind-quasi-affine morphisms

A bit of theory to be used later.

Definition 37.60.1. A scheme $X$ is ind-quasi-affine if every quasi-compact open of $X$ is quasi-affine. Similarly, a morphism of schemes $X \to Y$ is ind-quasi-affine if $f^{-1}(V)$ is ind-quasi-affine for each affine open $V$ in $Y$.

An example of an ind-quasi-affine scheme is an open of an affine scheme. If $X = \bigcup _{i \in I} U_ i$ is a union of quasi-affine opens such that any two $U_ i$ are contained in a third, then $X$ is ind-quasi-affine. An ind-quasi-affine scheme $X$ is separated because any two affine opens $U, V$ are contained in a separated open subscheme of $X$, namely $U \cup V$. Similarly an ind-quasi-affine morphism is separated.

Lemma 37.60.2. For a morphism of schemes $f : X \to Y$, the following are equivalent:

  1. $f$ is ind-quasi-affine,

  2. for every affine open subscheme $V \subset Y$ and every quasi-compact open subscheme $U \subset f^{-1}(V)$, the induced morphism $U \to V$ is quasi-affine.

  3. for some cover $\{ V_ j \} _{j \in J}$ of $Y$ by quasi-compact and quasi-separated open subschemes $V_ j \subset Y$, every $j \in J$, and every quasi-compact open subscheme $U \subset f^{-1}(V_ j)$, the induced morphism $U \to V_ j$ is quasi-affine.

  4. for every quasi-compact and quasi-separated open subscheme $V \subset Y$ and every quasi-compact open subscheme $U \subset f^{-1}(V)$, the induced morphism $U \to V$ is quasi-affine.

In particular, the property of being an ind-quasi-affine morphism is Zariski local on the base.

Proof. The equivalence (1) $\Leftrightarrow $ (2) follows from the definitions and Morphisms, Lemma 29.13.3. For (2) $\Rightarrow $ (4), let $U$ and $V$ be as in (4). By Schemes, Lemma 26.21.14, the induced morphism $U \to V$ is quasi-compact. Thus, for every affine open $V' \subset V$, the fiber product $V' \times _ V U$ is quasi-compact, so, by (2), the induced map $V' \times _ V U \to V'$ is quasi-affine. Thus, $U \to V$ is also quasi-affine by Morphisms, Lemma 29.13.3. This argument also gives (3) $\Rightarrow $ (4): indeed, keeping the same notation, those affine opens $V' \subset V$ that lie in one of the $V_ j$ cover $V$, so one needs to argue that the quasi-compact map $V' \times _ V U \to V'$ is quasi-affine. However, by (3), the composition $V' \times _ V U \to V' \to V_ j$ is quasi-affine and, by Schemes, Lemma 26.21.13, the map $V' \to V_ j$ is quasi-separated. Thus, $V' \times _ V U \to V'$ is quasi-affine by Morphisms, Lemma 29.13.8. The final implications (4) $\Rightarrow $ (2) and (4) $\Rightarrow $ (3) are evident. $\square$

Lemma 37.60.3. The property of being an ind-quasi-affine morphism is stable under composition.

Proof. Let $f : X \to Y$ and $g : Y \to Z$ be ind-quasi-affine morphisms. Let $V \subset Z$ and $U \subset f^{-1}(g^{-1}(V))$ be quasi-compact opens such that $V$ is also quasi-separated. The image $f(U)$ is a quasi-compact subset of $g^{-1}(V)$, so it is contained in some quasi-compact open $W \subset g^{-1}(V)$ (a union of finitely many affines). We obtain a factorization $U \to W \to V$. The map $W \to V$ is quasi-affine by Lemma 37.60.2, so, in particular, $W$ is quasi-separated. Then, by Lemma 37.60.2 again, $U \to W$ is quasi-affine as well. Consequently, by Morphisms, Lemma 29.13.4, the composition $U \to V$ is also quasi-affine, and it remains to apply Lemma 37.60.2 once more. $\square$

Lemma 37.60.4. Any quasi-affine morphism is ind-quasi-affine. Any immersion is ind-quasi-affine.

Proof. The first assertion is immediate from the definitions. In particular, affine morphisms, such as closed immersions, are ind-quasi-affine. Thus, by Lemma 37.60.3, it remains to show that an open immersion is ind-quasi-affine. This, however, is immediate from the definitions. $\square$

Lemma 37.60.5. If $f : X \to Y$ and $g : Y \to Z$ are morphisms of schemes such that $g \circ f$ is ind-quasi-affine, then $f$ is ind-quasi-affine.

Proof. By Lemma 37.60.2, we may work Zariski locally on $Z$ and then on $Y$, so we lose no generality by assuming that $Z$, and then also $Y$, is affine. Then any quasi-compact open of $X$ is quasi-affine, so Lemma 37.60.2 gives the claim. $\square$

Lemma 37.60.6. The property of being ind-quasi-affine is stable under base change.

Proof. Let $f : X \to Y$ be an ind-quasi-affine morphism. For checking that every base change of $f$ is ind-quasi-affine, by Lemma 37.60.2, we may work Zariski locally on $Y$, so we assume that $Y$ is affine. Furthermore, we may also assume that in the base change morphism $Z \to Y$ the scheme $Z$ is affine, too. The base change $X \times _ Y Z \to X$ is an affine morphism, so, by Lemmas 37.60.3 and 37.60.4, the map $X \times _ Y Z \to Y$ is ind-quasi-affine. Then, by Lemma 37.60.5, the base change $X \times _ Y Z \to Z$ is ind-quasi-affine, as desired. $\square$

Lemma 37.60.7. The property of being ind-quasi-affine is fpqc local on the base.

Proof. The stability of ind-quasi-affineness under base change supplied by Lemma 37.60.6 gives one direction. For the other, let $f : X \to Y$ be a morphism of schemes and let $\{ g_ i : Y_ i \to Y\} $ be an fpqc covering such that the base change $f_ i : X_ i \to Y_ i$ is ind-quasi-affine for all $i$. We need to show $f$ is ind-quasi-affine.

By Lemma 37.60.2, we may work Zariski locally on $Y$, so we assume that $Y$ is affine. Then we use stability under base change ensured by Lemma 37.60.6 to refine the cover and assume that it is given by a single affine, faithfully flat morphism $g : Y' \to Y$. For any quasi-compact open $U \subset X$, its $Y'$-base change $U \times _ Y Y' \subset X \times _ Y Y'$ is also quasi-compact. It remains to observe that, by Descent, Lemma 35.20.20, the map $U \to Y$ is quasi-affine if and only if so is $U \times _ Y Y' \to Y'$. $\square$

Lemma 37.60.8. A separated locally quasi-finite morphism of schemes is ind-quasi-affine.

Proof. Let $f : X \to Y$ be a separated locally quasi-finite morphism of schemes. Let $V \subset Y$ be affine and $U \subset f^{-1}(V)$ quasi-compact open. We have to show $U$ is quasi-affine. Since $U \to V$ is a separated quasi-finite morphism of schemes, this follows from Zariski's Main Theorem. See Lemma 37.39.2. $\square$


Comments (2)

Comment #1785 by Laurent Moret-Bailly on

Examples after the definition: an open of a quasi-projective scheme is not ind-quasi-affine in general! On the other hand, (an open of) a disjoint sum of quasi-affine schemes is, or more generally (an open of) a scheme with a filtered open covering by quasiaffines. (Any interesting examples of the latter?)

Typo in proof of 36.49.2: .

Comment #1788 by Laurent Moret-Bailly on

Examples after the definition: an open of a quasi-projective scheme (e.g. ) is not ind-quasi-affine in general! One could mention disjoint sums of quasi-affine schemes (but this is not a "new" example since is open in ). More generally (an open of) a scheme with a filtered open covering by quasiaffines is ind-quasi-affine. Any interesting examples of the latter?

Typo in proof of 36.49.2: .


Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.




In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 0AP5. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.